nmm 22 4500ICPSR35299MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2015 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR35299MiAaIMiAaI
2001 Chilean Social Mobility Survey
[electronic resource]
Florencia Torche
,
Guillermo Wormald
2015-04-20Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2015ICPSR35299NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The 2001 Chilean Social Mobility Survey examined inter-generational and intra-generational mobility in Chile. The data contain information on adult Chilean men's education, migration, current job, first job, social origins (parents' education, occupation, assets and living standards when the respondent was 14 years old), wife/partner, inter-generational transfers, household income and assets, respondent's siblings and focal brother, and respondent's opinions about inequality and determinants of economic well-being. Demographic variables include sex, age, education level, and socio-economic status.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35299.v1
educationicpsremploymenticpsrfamiliesicpsrincomeicpsrliving arrangementsicpsrpropertyicpsrsocial inequalityicpsrsocial mobilityicpsrsocioeconomic statusicpsrworkicpsrDSDR V. Migration and Population DistributionDSDR IV. Marriage, Family, Households, and UnionsICPSR XVI.B. Social Indicators, Nations Other Than the United StatesDSDR VI. Population CharacteristicsTorche, FlorenciaWormald, GuillermoInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)35299Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35299.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR36191MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2015 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR36191MiAaIMiAaI
Child Care and Development Fund Administrative Data, Federal Fiscal Year 2012
[electronic resource]
United States Department of Health and Human Services. Administration for Children and Families. Office of Child Care
2015-06-30Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2015ICPSR36191NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
This administrative dataset provides descriptive information about the families and children served through the federal Child Care and Development Fund (CCDF). CCDF dollars are provided to states, territories, and tribes to provide assistance to low-income families receiving or in transition from temporary public assistance, to obtain quality child care so they can work, or depending on their state's policy, to attend training or receive education. The Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act of 1996 requires states and territories to collect information on all family units receiving assistance through the CCDF and to submit monthly case-level data to the Office of Child Care. States are permitted to report case-level data for the entire population, or a sample of the population, under approved sampling guidelines.
The Summary Records file contains monthly state-level summary information including the number of families served. The Family Records file contains family-level data including single parent status of the head of household, monthly co-payment amount, date on which child care assistance began, reasons for care (e.g., employment, training/education, protective services, etc.), income used to determine eligibility, source of income, and the family size on which eligibility is based. The Child Records file contains child-level data including ethnicity, race, gender, and date of birth. The Setting Records file contains information about the type of child care setting, the total amount paid to the provider, and the total number of hours of care received by the child. The Pooling Factor file provides state-level data on the percentage of child care funds that is provided through the CCDF, the federal Head Start region the grantee (state) is in and is monitored by, and the state FIPS code for the grantee.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36191.v1
age groupsicpsrchild careicpsrChild Care and Development Fundicpsrchildrenicpsrfamiliesicpsrlow income groupsicpsrmarital statusicpsrpublic assistance programsicpsrraceicpsrrecordsicpsrwelfare reformicpsrworking pooricpsrCCEERC I.B.1. Assessment and MeasurementICPSR VIII. Governmental Structures, Policies, and CapabilitiesUnited States Department of Health and Human Services. Administration for Children and Families. Office of Child CareInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)36191Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36191.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR04538MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2007 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR04538MiAaIMiAaI
Chitwan Valley [Nepal] Family Study
[electronic resource]Changing Social Contexts and Family Formation
William G. Axinn
,
Arland Thornton
,
Jennifer S. Barber
,
Susan A. Murphy
,
Dirgha Ghimire
,
Thomas Fricke
,
Stephen Matthews
,
Dharma Dangol
,
Lisa Pearce
,
Ann Biddlecom
,
Sundar Shrehtha
,
Douglas Massey
2014-10-01Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2007ICPSR4538NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The study was designed to investigate the influence of changing social contexts on family formation behaviors, marriage, childbearing, and contraceptive use. The research investigates the extent to which changes in the community produce changes in family formation behavior, and whether the family organization of individual life courses produces these changes in behavior. The study used a combination of ethnographic and survey research methods to gather 171 neighborhood histories, 142 school histories, 118 health service histories, 20 bus route histories, household farming practices, family planning histories, and household composition in Western Chitwan, Nepal. Personal histories were gathered from the 5,271 individuals ages 15-59 years living in these neighborhoods using a semi-structured Life History Calendar and a highly structured survey questionnaire. The sample neighborhoods for this study were chosen to represent the five major ethnic groups inhabiting the area: high caste Hindus, hill Tibeto-Burmese (such as Gurung, Tamang, and Magar), indigenous terai Tibeto-Burmese (such as Tharu, Darai, and Kumal), Newar, and other caste Hindus. Neighborhood history calendars measured the neighborhood's distance, in terms of minutes walking, to a variety of organizations and services. Schools were defined as places of instruction for children of any age or grade. Health clinics were defined as any places of care and healing, such as doctors' offices, hospitals, and health posts. Employers were any places that employed 10 or more people for pay. Cinemas were movie theaters or halls where movies were shown. Bus stops were any places where people could obtain a ride for pay on a vehicle.
This particular study spanned 1997-2002. These data were combined with data from the Chitwan Valley Family Study 1996-1997, and the Household Agriculture and Consumption Survey 1996.
** IMPORTANT NOTE FOR STATA USERS **
The Stata files for datasets 7, 15, 16, 18, and 32 were produced in Stata 13. Users of earlier versions of Stata will not be able to read them.
There are a few options for users of Stata 12 or earlier to work around the compatibility issue:
- Upgrade to Stata 13
- Find a computer with Stata 13 and use the 'saveold' command to create a Version 12 file
- Use the latest version of a file conversion utility, such as Stat/Transfer (older versions cannot read Stata 13 files)
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04538.v8
agricultureicpsrbirth controlicpsrchild rearingicpsrchildrenicpsrcommunitiesicpsrcommuting (travel)icpsrfamiliesicpsrfamily planningicpsrfamily structureicpsrhealth careicpsrhealth services utilizationicpsrhousehold compositionicpsrliving arrangementsicpsrmarriageicpsrneighborhood characteristicsicpsrneighborhoodsicpsrprenatal careicpsrsocial changeicpsrsocial environmenticpsrIDRC II. Economic DataDSDR I. Fertility, Family Planning, Sexual Behavior, and Reproductive HealthICPSR XVII.D. Social Institutions and Behavior, Age and the Life CycleDSDR IV. Marriage, Family, Households, and UnionsDSDR VI. Population CharacteristicsDSDR III. Health and MortalityIDRC V. Health DataDSDR VIII. NICHD Supported StudiesICPSR XVII.H. Social Institutions and Behavior, Family and GenderIDRC VI. Human Dimension of International RelationsAxinn, William G.Thornton, ArlandBarber, Jennifer S.Murphy, Susan A.Ghimire, DirghaFricke, ThomasMatthews, StephenDangol, DharmaPearce, LisaBiddlecom, AnnShrehtha, SundarMassey, DouglasInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)4538Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR04538.v8 nmm 22 4500ICPSR34719MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2014 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR34719MiAaIMiAaI
Community Healthy Marriage Initiative Survey for Six Cities, 2007-2010
[electronic resource]
Robert Lerman
,
Anupa Bir
2014-10-02Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2014ICPSR34719NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to ICPSR member institutions.Also available as downloadable files.
The Community Healthy Marriage Initiative (CHMI) evaluation was designed to evaluate community-level impacts of various relationship and marriage education programs. This study compared three sites which received grant funding from the Administration for Children and Families (ACF) (Dallas, Texas; St. Louis, Missouri; and Milwaukee, Wisconsin) with three cities that did not receive grant-funding (Fort Worth, Texas; Kansas City, Missouri; and Cleveland, Ohio) to determine what impacts grant funding has on these types of programs. This collection includes two rounds of surveys, one conducted in 2007 and one conducted in 2009, for longitudinal comparison. Respondents were asked a series of questions regarding their knowledge of relationship and marriage education programs in their area, including where they had learned of the classes, what source of advertising they had heard or seen, whether they knew where the classes were held, and whether they had discussed the classes with someone else.
Information was collected to gauge respondents' participation in these courses, including whether they had taken a class in the previous 18 months, how long they attended the courses, whether they had received other services as a result of attending the classes, and whether they had suggested the classes to someone else.
Respondents were also queried on whether they would be interested in attending a relationship class or a parenting class. Additional topics included parental relationships with their children, and relationship quality. Demographic variables include relationship status, household composition, employment status, parental status, race, age, and household income.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34719.v3
child rearingicpsrchildrenicpsrcommunity organizationsicpsrcounselingicpsrcounseling servicesicpsrdomestic violenceicpsreducationicpsreducational programsicpsrfamiliesicpsrfamily conflicticpsrfamily counselingicpsrfamily historyicpsrfamily lifeicpsrfamily relationshipsicpsrfamily servicesicpsrfamily structureicpsrhousehold compositionicpsrincomeicpsrjob historyicpsrmarriageicpsrmarriage counselingicpsrmedia useicpsrparental attitudesicpsrparenting skillsicpsrparentsicpsrpublic housingicpsrpublic opinionicpsrsocial servicesicpsrsocial supporticpsrspouse abuseicpsrspousesicpsrICPSR XVII.H. Social Institutions and Behavior, Family and GenderLerman, RobertBir, AnupaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)34719Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34719.v3 nmm 22 4500ICPSR33101MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2013 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR33101MiAaIMiAaI
Evaluation of SAFEChildren, a Family-Focused Prevention Program in Chicago, Illinois, 2006-2010
[electronic resource]
Patrick Tolan
,
David Henry
,
Deborah Gorman-Smith
,
Michael Schoeny
2015-05-12Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2013ICPSR33101NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
Schools and Families Educating Children (SAFEChildren) is a family-focused program designed to aid families residing in high risk communities with child development during the child's transition to school. The program has the goal of building protection and impeding risk trajectories for aggression, violence, and school failure. The program utilizes multiple family groups (four to six families) combined with reading tutoring for the child. The SAFE Effectiveness Trial (SAFE-E) involved community providers delivering the family group intervention and upper grade students delivering the tutoring program. The trial took place between 2006 and 2010, and involved two age cohorts of children. Collaborating with two community mental health agencies and six elementary schools serving high-poverty, high-crime neighborhoods in Chicago, Illinois, families were randomly assigned to intervention groups of four to six families during their child's first grade year. Children also received tutoring from tutors selected from the upper grades of the child's school. Assessments were collected prior to, during and after the intervention to assess developmental influences, fidelity, process, and implementation characteristics that might affect impact. The purpose of these assessments was to examine the relation of implementation qualities to variation in intervention effects. Quality of implementation was expected to affect short and long-term impact of the intervention, focusing on three primary areas: (1) fidelity of implementation of the program, (2) provider characteristics, such as tutors' reading levels, and attitudes and orientation of the family intervention providers, and (3) quality of support for implementation. The data are from fidelity and process measures developed for this study and measures completed by parents, teachers, and children over four waves of measurement spanning two years, beginning in the fall of each child's first grade year.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33101.v2
AIDSicpsralcoholicpsrbehavior problemsicpsrchild developmenticpsrcrime preventionicpsrdelinquent behavioricpsrfamiliesicpsrfamily relationsicpsrHIVicpsrinner cityicpsrinterventionicpsrparental attitudesicpsrparental influenceicpsrprocess evaluationicpsrprogram evaluationicpsrriskicpsrtutoringicpsrNACJD VII. Crime and DelinquencyNAHDAP I. National Addiction and HIV Data Archive ProgramICPSR XVII.E. Social Institutions and Behavior, Crime and the Criminal Justice SystemTolan, PatrickHenry, DavidGorman-Smith, DeborahSchoeny, MichaelInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)33101Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33101.v2 nmm 22 4500ICPSR29462MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2010 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR29462MiAaIMiAaI
Head Start Impact Study (HSIS), 2002-2006 [United States]
[electronic resource]
United States Department of Health and Human Services. Administration for Children and Families. Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation
2015-03-23Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2010ICPSR29462NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
eral program,
represents the full range of quality within the national program,
employs a randomized control design, the strongest design for testing impacts,
examines all domains of children's school readiness, as well as parenting outcomes,
follows children through their early years of elementary school, and
compares children who have access to Head Start to a control group that includes many children in center-based and other forms of early childhood education programs.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR29462.v5
child healthicpsrchildrenicpsrcognitive developmenticpsrcognitive functioningicpsrearly childhood educationicpsremotional developmenticpsrfamiliesicpsrHead Starticpsrlow income groupsicpsrparent child relationshipicpsrparentsicpsrprogram evaluationicpsrschool readinessicpsrCCEERC I. Children and Child DevelopmentCCEERC I.B.3. Physical Development and Growth ICPSR V. EducationUnited States Department of Health and Human Services. Administration for Children and Families. Office of Planning, Research and EvaluationInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)29462Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR29462.v5 nmm 22 4500ICPSR36151MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2015 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR36151MiAaIMiAaI
India Human Development Survey-II (IHDS-II), 2011-12
[electronic resource]
Sonalde Desai
,
Reeve Vanneman
2015-07-31Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2015ICPSR36151NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The India Human Development Survey-II (IHDS-II), 2011-12 is a nationally representative, multi-topic survey of 42,152 households in 1,503 villages and 971 urban neighborhoods across India. These data are mostly re-interviews of households interviewed for IHDS-I in 2004-05. Two one-hour interviews in each household covered topics concerning health, education, employment, economic status, marriage, fertility, gender relations, and social capital. Children aged 8-11 completed short reading, writing and arithmetic tests.
The IHDS-II data are assembled in three datasets:
Individual
Household
Eligible Women
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36151.v2
child rearingicpsreducationicpsrfamiliesicpsrfamily planningicpsrfertilityicpsrgender rolesicpsrhousehold expendituresicpsrincomeicpsrmarriageicpsrsocioeconomic statusicpsrICPSR XVI.B. Social Indicators, Nations Other Than the United StatesDSDR IV. Marriage, Family, Households, and UnionsDSDR I. Fertility, Family Planning, Sexual Behavior, and Reproductive HealthICPSR XVII.H. Social Institutions and Behavior, Family and GenderDesai, SonaldeVanneman, ReeveInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)36151Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR36151.v2 nmm 22 4500ICPSR26344MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2010 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR26344MiAaIMiAaI
Integrated Fertility Survey Series, Release 7, 1955-2002 [United States]
[electronic resource]
Pamela Smock
,
Peter Granda
,
Lynette Hoelter
2015-06-18Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2010ICPSR26344NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to ICPSR member institutions.Also available as downloadable files.
The Integrated Fertility Survey Series (IFSS) integrates data from ten underlying component studies of family and fertility: the Growth of American Families studies of 1955 and 1960; the National Survey of Fertility of 1965 and 1970; and the National Surveys of Family Growth of 1973, 1976, 1982, 1988, 1995, and 2002. The first release contains harmonized sociodemographic variables for all respondents from all ten component studies, including those related to marital status, race and ethnicity, education, income, migration, religion, and region of origin, among others. The second release adds harmonized husband/partner sociodemographic variables as well as harmonized union history variables. The third release adds harmonized pregnancy, adoption, non-biological children, and menstruation variables. The fourth release adds harmonized fertility variables. The fifth release includes the addition of the pregnancy interval file. This file contains 217,128 pregnancy records with information pertaining to the pregnancies of all respondents. The sixth release adds comparative sample variables to the respondent and pregnancy interval files, and includes the addition of the contraceptive calendar file. This file contains 53,317 records with information pertaining to type and frequency of contraceptive use. The seventh release includes additional variables related to contraceptive knowledge, contraceptive use, birth control and family planning services, sexual history, infertility, and sterilizing operations. It also adds sociodemographic and union history variables. Imputed data through the third release are also included.
Additional information about the Integrated Fertility Survey Series can be found on the IFSS Web site.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR26344.v7
adopted childrenicpsradoptionicpsrbirth controlicpsrchildrenicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrfamiliesicpsrfamily backgroundicpsrfamily planningicpsrfamily sizeicpsrfertilityicpsrincomeicpsrmarital statusicpsrmarriageicpsrpregnancyicpsrreligionicpsrsexual behavioricpsrDSDR I. Fertility, Family Planning, Sexual Behavior, and Reproductive HealthIFSS I. Integrated Fertility Survey SeriesICPSR XVII.H. Social Institutions and Behavior, Family and GenderDSDR VIII. NICHD Supported StudiesSmock, PamelaGranda, PeterHoelter, LynetteInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)26344Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR26344.v7 nmm 22 4500ICPSR34420MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2014 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR34420MiAaIMiAaI
Supporting Healthy Marriage Evaluation
[electronic resource]Eight Sites within the United States, 2003-2013
JoAnn Hsueh
,
Virginia Knox
2014-12-19Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2014ICPSR34420NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The Supporting Healthy Marriage (SHM) evaluation was launched in 2003 to develop, to implement, and to test the effectiveness of a program aimed at strengthening low-income couples' marriages as one approach for supporting stable and nurturing family environments and parents' and children's well-being. The evaluation was led by MDRC and was sponsored by the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation in the Administration for Children and Families, United States Department of Health and Human Services.The SHM program was a voluntary yearlong marriage education program for low-income married couples who had children or were expecting a child. The program provided a series of group workshops based on structured curricula designed to enhance couples' relationships; supplemental activities to build on workshop themes; and family support services to address participation barriers, connect families with other services, and reinforce curricular themes.
The study sample consists of 6,298 couples (12,596 adult sample members) who were expecting a child or had a child under 18 years old at the time of study entry. The sample consists primarily of low-to-modest income, married couples with diverse racial and ethnic backgrounds. In each family, one child was randomly selected to be the focus of any child-related measures gathered in the data collection activities. These children ranged from pre-birth to 14 years old at the time of enrollment in the study. Follow-up interviews were conducted at 12 and 30 months after baseline data collection. More detail is provided in the study documentation.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34420.v2
familiesicpsrfamily structureicpsrhealth attitudesicpsrchild developmenticpsrchild rearingicpsrchild welfareicpsrchildhoodicpsrchildrenicpsrdivorceicpsrdrinking behavioricpsrdrug useicpsremploymenticpsrhealth statusicpsrhousehold compositionicpsrhousehold incomeicpsrlanguageicpsrmarriageicpsrmarriage counselingicpsroutcome evaluationicpsrparent child relationshipicpsrparental attitudesicpsrparental influenceicpsrparenting skillsicpsrpoverty programsicpsrpregnancyicpsrsocial behavioricpsrwork experienceicpsrworking hoursicpsrICPSR XVII.H. Social Institutions and Behavior, Family and GenderDSDR IV. Marriage, Family, Households, and UnionsHsueh, JoAnnKnox, VirginiaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)34420Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR34420.v2 nmm 22 4500ICPSR03843MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2005 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR03843MiAaIMiAaI
Swedish Adoption/Twin Study on Aging (SATSA), 1984, 1987, 1990, 1993, 2004, 2007, and 2010
[electronic resource]
Nancy L. Pedersen
2015-05-13Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2005ICPSR3843NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The Swedish Adoption/Twin Study on Aging (SATSA) was designed to study the origins of individual differences in aging and the environmental and genetic factors that are involved. SATSA began in 1984, and six additional waves were conducted in 1987, 1990, 1993, 2004, 2007, and 2010.
The questionnaire was initially sent to all twins from the Swedish Twin Registry who were separated at an early age and raised apart; the survey was also administered to a control sample of twins who were raised together. The respondents were surveyed on items that included health status, how they were raised, work environment, alcohol consumption, and dietary and smoking habits, as well as questions about personality and attitudes; this information comprised the first component.
The second component was collected from a subsample composed of 150 pairs of twins raised apart and 150 pairs of twins raised together. This subsample participated in seven waves of in-person testing, which included a health examination, structured interviews, and tests on functional capacity, cognitive abilities, and memory.
The data are represented according to questionnaire and time number, and correspond to each wave/year: Questionnaire 1 and In-Person Testing Time 1 were in 1984; Questionnaire 2 and In-Person Testing Time 2 were in 1987; Questionnaire 3 and In-Person Testing Time 3 were in 1990; Questionnaire 4 and In-Person Testing Time 4 were in 1993; Questionnaire 5 was in 2003; In-Person Testing Time 5 was in 2004; Questionnaire 6 and In-Person Testing Time 6 were in 2007; In-Person Testing Time 7 was in 2010. The Administrative and Cognitive datasets include data from all years/waves. The Smell Survey dataset only includes data from 1990. No years were specified for the Contact measures and Separation measures datasets.
Demographic and background information includes age, sex, education, family history, household composition and employment.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03843.v2
abilityicpsractivities of daily livingicpsradopted childrenicpsradoptionicpsragingicpsralcohol consumptionicpsrallergiesicpsranxietyicpsrassociationsicpsrattitudesicpsrcaregiversicpsrchronic disabilitiesicpsrchronic illnessesicpsrconflicticpsrcultural attitudesicpsrcultural traditionsicpsrdeathicpsrdeath of spouseicpsrdementiaicpsrdemographic characteristicsicpsrdemographyicpsrdiabetesicpsrdieticpsrdisabilitiesicpsrdiseaseicpsreating habitsicpsreducationicpsrriskicpsrrisk assessmenticpsrrisk factorsicpsrsiblingsicpsrsmokingicpsrsocioeconomic statusicpsreducational backgroundicpsremotional problemsicpsremploymenticpsrenvironmenticpsreveryday lifeicpsreyesighticpsrfamiliesicpsrfamily conflicticpsrfamily historiesicpsrfamily historyicpsrfamily lifeicpsrfamily relationshipsicpsrfamily structureicpsrfoodicpsrfriendshipsicpsrhealthicpsrhealth problemsicpsrhealth statusicpsrhearing aidsicpsrhome careicpsrhome environmenticpsrhostilityicpsrhousehold compositionicpsrhouseworkicpsrillnessicpsrinjuriesicpsrleisureicpsrlife eventsicpsrlifestylesicpsrliving arrangementsicpsrliving conditionsicpsrlong term careicpsrmanagementicpsrmedicineicpsrmemoryicpsrmental healthicpsrmiscarriagesicpsroccupationsicpsrolder adultsicpsropinionsicpsroptimismicpsrpainicpsrparentsicpsrpersonalityicpsrpessimismicpsrphysical appearanceicpsrphysical characteristicsicpsrphysical conditionicpsrphysical limitationsicpsrpopulation characteristicsicpsrpopulationsicpsrprescription drugsicpsrpsychological wellbeingicpsrrecreationicpsrrelativesicpsrretirementicpsrretirement planningicpsrretirement plansicpsrstillbirthsicpsrtesting and measurementicpsrtwinsicpsrworkicpsrwork attitudesicpsrwork environmenticpsrworkplacesicpsrDSDR III. Health and MortalityIDRC V. Health DataIDRC II. Economic DataIDRC VI. Human Dimension of International RelationsDSDR IV. Marriage, Family, Households, and UnionsICPSR XVII. Social Institutions and BehaviorDSDR IX. NIA Supported StudiesNACDA IV. Psychological Characteristics, Mental Health, and Well-Being of Older AdultsDSDR XII. Childhood ObesityPedersen, Nancy L.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)3843Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR03843.v2 nmm 22 4500ICPSR35003MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2014 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR35003MiAaIMiAaI
Third Grade Follow-up to the Head Start Impact Study (HSIS), 2007-2008, United States
[electronic resource]
Michael Puma
,
Stephen Bell
,
Ronna Cook
,
Camilla Heid
2015-03-23Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2014ICPSR35003NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
ta also was collected on the child's perception of his/her academic and social skills.
Both studies, for different grade levels, examined differences in outcomes in several domains related to school readiness: children's cognitive, social-emotional, health, and parenting outcomes (e.g., use of spanking, exposing children to cultural enrichment activities, and parenting styles). It also examined whether impacts differed based on characteristics of the children and their families, including the child's pre-academic skills at the beginning of the study; the child's primary language; whether the child has special needs; the mother's race/ethnicity; the primary caregiver's level of depressive symptoms; household risk; and urban or rural location.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35003.v1
low income groupsicpsrparent child relationshipicpsrparentsicpsrprogram evaluationicpsrschool readinessicpsrchild developmenticpsrchild healthicpsrchildrenicpsrcognitive functioningicpsrearly childhood educationicpsremotional developmenticpsrfamiliesicpsrHead StarticpsrCCEERC X. Research and Evaluation MethodsCCEERC XII. Parent, School, and Community School Readiness/Child School Success and PerformanceCCEERC XII.C. School Performance and SuccessCCEERC VI.A.3. Early Head Start/Head StartCCEERC VI. Programs, Interventions and CurriculaCCEERC I.B. Child Development and School ReadinessICPSR V. EducationICPSR V.A. Education, United StatesCCEERC VI.A. ProgramsCCEERC I. Children and Child DevelopmentPuma, MichaelBell, StephenCook, RonnaHeid, CamillaInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)35003Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR35003.v1 nmm 22 4500ICPSR33506MiAaIm f a u cr mn mmmmuuuu150802s2015 miu f a eng d(MiAaI)ICPSR33506MiAaIMiAaI
Vietnam Longitudinal Survey, 1995-1998
[electronic resource]
Charles Hirschman
,
Tuong Lai
,
Pham Bich San
2015-07-14Ann Arbor, Mich.Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research [distributor]2015ICPSR33506NumericTitle from ICPSR DDI metadata of 2015-08-02.AVAILABLE. This study is freely available to the general public.Also available as downloadable files.
The Vietnam Longitudinal Survey, 1995-1998 (VLS) sought to analyze the impact of changing household economies on demographic phenomena such as marriage, pregnancy, and family composition in Vietnam. The VLS was the first longitudinal sociological survey and one of the largest sociological surveys ever conducted in Vietnam. The study was part of a long-term collaborative research program between the Institute of Sociology (IOS), Hanoi - Vietnam, and Professor Charles Hirschman from the University of Washington-Seattle.
The VLS emerged as the result of extensive exchange between IOS researchers and Charles Hirschman following their first collaborative project, the
Vietnam Life History Survey (VLHS)
, which was conducted in 1991 (ICPSR 31101). During the 1994-95 academic year, Hirschman and IOS jointly developed a detailed plan for the VLS based on their previous experiences from the
VLHS
. Ten communes in the provinces of Nam Ha and Ninh Binh were selected for the VLS survey using probability sampling methods. In July 1995, the pretest survey was carried out in the Dai Xuyen commune approximately 40km south of Hanoi. Baseline interviews were conducted from September to November of 1995, with 1,855 households and 4,464 individuals surveyed for the first round. The second round of interviewing was carried out from August to September of 1996, with 1,820 households and 4,340 individuals successfully re-interviewed. The third round was carried out in July and August of 1997, with 1811 households and 4309 individuals re-interviewed. The fourth and final round of the survey was conducted in July and August of 1998, with a final household count of 1,795 and 4,222 individual respondents.
Data were collected at the individual and household level for each survey year. Household-level variables measured several household attributes, including size of land and living space, house construction materials, number of rooms and amenities, ownership of appliances, vehicles, and livestock, types and amount of agricultural production. Individual-level variables measured traditional courtship and wedding customs, familial marriage negotiations, marital history, pregnancy and birth history, as well as experiences with abstinence, various contraceptive methods, abortion, pregnancy, and breastfeeding. Household-level demographic variables provide information on household composition, including number of members, age, sex, ethnicity, education level, marital status, and occupation of each household member, as well as total household income. Individual-level demographic variables include age, sex, ethnicity, religion, education level, occupation, job history, income, marital status, and information on children of respondents.
Cf.: http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33506.v1
abortionicpsragricultural productionicpsreducationicpsrfamiliesicpsrfamily planningicpsrhousehold incomeicpsrhousing conditionsicpsrlabor (work)icpsrmarriageicpsrpregnancyicpsrICPSR XVII.H. Social Institutions and Behavior, Family and GenderDSDR I. Fertility, Family Planning, Sexual Behavior, and Reproductive HealthICPSR II. Community and Urban StudiesDSDR IV. Marriage, Family, Households, and UnionsHirschman, CharlesLai, TuongBich San, PhamInter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research.ICPSR (Series)33506Access restricted ; authentication may be required:http://doi.org/10.3886/ICPSR33506.v1